Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Flawed workflow game testing #955

Open
samdev-7 opened this issue Mar 12, 2023 · 0 comments
Open

Flawed workflow game testing #955

samdev-7 opened this issue Mar 12, 2023 · 0 comments
Assignees
Labels
bug Something isn't working tech debt

Comments

@samdev-7
Copy link
Member

Before the update, in V1, the test has two main issues:

  • Some games caused the test to hang: example; this is quite rare.
  • Not up-to-date branches/forks caused the test to fail to find files that were updated: example; this is common but can be easily fixed manually.

With the update, the test needs to be updated to use the new engine, as well as fixing the issued above.

After a discussion, the current idea is to create two workflow tests:

  • One for game submissions: only checking the one game submitted, making it fast.
  • Another for checking engine changes: uses a "game" designed to test the engine.
@samdev-7 samdev-7 added the bug Something isn't working label Mar 12, 2023
@samdev-7 samdev-7 changed the title Fix workflow test issues and update to use new engine Workflow test issues and update to use new engine Mar 12, 2023
@samdev-7 samdev-7 changed the title Workflow test issues and update to use new engine Flawed workflow game testing Mar 12, 2023
@samdev-7 samdev-7 added this to Sprig Mar 12, 2023
@samdev-7 samdev-7 moved this to Should we do this? in Sprig Mar 12, 2023
@grymmy grymmy moved this from Should we do this? to Todo (queue) in Sprig Mar 15, 2023
@grymmy grymmy removed their assignment Mar 15, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
bug Something isn't working tech debt
Projects
Status: Todo (queue)
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants